>>/40117/
What made me post it was what I found it in the Preface of the 2016 Edition.
all through the years to the last coup recorded in 2015, the essence of the coup d’état has remained exactly the same: it is a special form of politics that requires guns as an aid to persuasion, although coups rarely succeed if guns are much used and fail totally if the situation degenerates into civil war—the polar opposite of the swift and bloodless coup d’état.
Made me think that a failure of a coup doesn't just mean it didn't succeed and the people whom they wanted to remove from power will remain, there are other consequences for the act; and yes a civil war is a failure of grand proportion (even if the side wins which started the coup).
And your topic is a very successful putsch, and now I'm thinking those Brazilian officers really did know what they were doing (in a theoretical sense; they might had very incomplete information what is going on out in the field about them and as a consequence they might were very unsure what their next step should be), and avoiding bloodshed was a top priority.
>>/40121/
It seems to be a study of coup d'etats, by a military historian. I haven't read much of anything but I'm expecting he author dissecting the topic, and making generalized observations based on individual cases.
Here's the short contents:
1. What Is the Coup d’État?
2. When Is a Coup d’État Possible?
3. The Strategy of the Coup d’État
4. The Planning of the Coup d’État
5. The Execution of the Coup d’État